OF JUDGMENT: 11/26/2016
WINSTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HON. GEORGE M. MITCHELL JR.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: KEITH HIGGINBOTHAM (PRO SE)
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: TAYLOR TUCKER
DISTRICT ATTORNEY: DOUG EVANS
LEE, C.J., CARLTON AND GREENLEE, JJ.
Keith Higginbotham was convicted of disorderly conduct and
public profanity in the Louisville Municipal Court and
sentenced to pay a fine of $246.25 for each charge.
Higginbotham appealed his conviction to the Winston County
Circuit Court. After a bench trial de novo, the circuit court
entered an order finding Higginbotham guilty of disorderly
conduct and public profanity. The circuit court sentenced
Higginbotham to pay a fine of $246.25 for each charge.
Higginbotham now appeals.
Finding that the circuit court failed to enter an order
disposing of Higginbotham's motion for a new trial, we
lack jurisdiction to address Higginbotham's appeal. We
Officer Vernon Eichelberger of the Louisville Police
Department testified that on July 3, 2016, Higginbotham
approached him in the Walmart parking lot and began shouting
racial slurs and using profane language. Officer Eichelberger
arrested Higginbotham on charges of public profanity and
On September 13, 2016, the municipal court found Higginbotham
guilty of public profanity and disorderly conduct and
sentenced him to pay a fine of $246.25 for each charge.
Higginbotham appealed to the circuit court. The circuit court
held a bench trial de novo on November 14, 2016, and heard
testimony from Officer Eichelberger. Higginbotham represented
After the trial, the circuit court found Higginbotham guilty
of public profanity under Mississippi Code Annotated section
97-29-47 (Rev. 2014) and disorderly conduct under Mississippi
Code Annotated section 97-35-7(1) (Rev. 2014). On December 2,
2016, the circuit court entered an order sentencing
Higginbotham to pay a fine of $246.25 for each charge, plus
Higginbotham appeals, asserting the following assignments of
error: (1) the circuit court erred in excluding the
surveillance tapes from evidence; (2) he should not have been
held to the same standard as an attorney; (3) the State
failed to inform him of the statutes under which he was being